Apple to Update MacBook Pro and MacBook Air in June 2013 with New Processors, All Retina?

[cmChimera]

You are more likely to get struck by lightning then somehow develop corrupted ram in a laptop you have had for awhile.

Yeah, I didn't mention that. We likely will never find out.

 

[Michael Scrip]

Steve jobs said that 10" was the only reasonable size for a tablet, too. ;]

I think he said that competitors' 7" tablets were not ideal.

And I agree. 7" 16:9 tablets are too narrow in portrait and too short in landscape.

Even though 4:3 is "outdated" I still think it's great for tablets.

----------

Really? I was on the road today, and most of the BMWs I saw were early 2000s models. Most cars in Germany are definetly not expensive cars. Ever heard of Dacia?

Apple prices are too high for European customers. The iPhone here has a low marketshare, and that is mainly because of outrageous off contract pricing. Why would anyone get the iPhone 5 for 679 EUROS over the S3 at 399 Euros?

Came could be translated to the mac, raising mac prices in Europe would kill off Apple marketshare in this continent.

Apple has never been afraid of selling high-priced computers.

Their laptops start at $1000 in a world where $500 Windows PCs are the norm.

I don't think market share is their ultimate goal...

 

[sseaton1971]

hmm... my read of it was Haswell, but just to invoke a crazy theory -- "new processor platform" - something not intel?

arn

Doubtful... There has been no word from Apple about a processor transition. When Apple switched from PPC to Intel, Jobs announced the decision to move to the new processor platform at WWDC in the summer of 2005. The first Intel-based Macs did not go on sale until 2006. I would think something this big would get the same or similar treatment at the developers conference.

 

[sseaton1971]

There's a DigiTimes RUMOR that the 2013 MacBook Pros and Airs all will have Retina displays, as well as a new processor platform. Someone on this thread idly wonders whether "new processor platform" might mean a non-Intel processor, although all other rumors have said that next year's Macs will use Haswell. From that, you (and others) have jumped to the conclusion that all-Retina, non-Intel MacBook Airs and Pros are going to happen, that there will be a price increase, and that much of your prior software might become obsolete.

An all-Retina lineup does seem plausible, although I expected it might take another year, for technical reasons that have been discussed in other threads. But it might happen. When Apple released the Retina iPhone 4, it didn't cost any more than the non-Retina iPhone 3GS did the previous year. When they released the Retina iPad 3, it didn't cost any more than the non-Retina iPad 2 did the previous year. When they released the Retina MacBook Pros this year, they charged a premium for the Retina screen, but non-Retina versions are still available at lower prices. By next summer, with economies of scale, the cost of 11" and 13" Retina panels might be low enough that Apple doesn't need to charge a premium. After all, an 11" panel would have close to the same area as the iPad's panel, when you factor in their different aspect ratios. If Haswell's integrated GPU can adequately drive an 11" and 13" display for the tasks for which the MBA is intended, and if battery life will be as good as or better than that of the current MBAs, then I suspect we'll see Retina displays across the board. I wouldn't put it past Apple to charge a $100 premium for a Retina MBA, but the reasons I don't think they will are 1) it would get rid of that psychologically important sub-$1,000 (i.e., $999) entry-level price point and 2) they make plenty of margin on their RAM and SSD upgrades.

As for switching to a non-Intel processor platform, there's been no credible evidence so far that Apple has an ARM processor in the works that would be powerful enough to handle the heavy-duty apps that currently run under OS X. Other people who know more about the architecture than I do have written about what would be involved in recoding applications once ARM becomes powerful enough, assuming Apple eventually decides to go that route.

Of course, I could be wrong – but, geez, people, how about waiting for these rumors to become reality before dumping on Apple? There's enough to complain about already, such as what they charge for SSD upgrades.

I'm itching to replace my early 2008 MBP, which is painfully slow for Aperture, but I'm going to try to hold out for the Haswell lineup and see how the new machines perform.

Good post... Thank you for NOT being an idiot! I can't believe how worked up people get about rumors. It is one thing to speculate, but it is another thing to blast Apple for something they haven't even done yet... and might never do. The sky is not falling people!

 

[Freyqq]

There's a DigiTimes RUMOR that the 2013 MacBook Pros and Airs all will have Retina displays, as well as a new processor platform. Someone on this thread idly wonders whether "new processor platform" might mean a non-Intel processor, although all other rumors have said that next year's Macs will use Haswell. From that, you (and others) have jumped to the conclusion that all-Retina, non-Intel MacBook Airs and Pros are going to happen, that there will be a price increase, and that much of your prior software might become obsolete.

An all-Retina lineup does seem plausible, although I expected it might take another year, for technical reasons that have been discussed in other threads. But it might happen. When Apple released the Retina iPhone 4, it didn't cost any more than the non-Retina iPhone 3GS did the previous year. When they released the Retina iPad 3, it didn't cost any more than the non-Retina iPad 2 did the previous year. When they released the Retina MacBook Pros this year, they charged a premium for the Retina screen, but non-Retina versions are still available at lower prices. By next summer, with economies of scale, the cost of 11" and 13" Retina panels might be low enough that Apple doesn't need to charge a premium. After all, an 11" panel would have close to the same area as the iPad's panel, when you factor in their different aspect ratios. If Haswell's integrated GPU can adequately drive an 11" and 13" display for the tasks for which the MBA is intended, and if battery life will be as good as or better than that of the current MBAs, then I suspect we'll see Retina displays across the board. I wouldn't put it past Apple to charge a $100 premium for a Retina MBA, but the reasons I don't think they will are 1) it would get rid of that psychologically important sub-$1,000 (i.e., $999) entry-level price point and 2) they make plenty of margin on their RAM and SSD upgrades.

As for switching to a non-Intel processor platform, there's been no credible evidence so far that Apple has an ARM processor in the works that would be powerful enough to handle the heavy-duty apps that currently run under OS X. Other people who know more about the architecture than I do have written about what would be involved in recoding applications once ARM becomes powerful enough, assuming Apple eventually decides to go that route.

Of course, I could be wrong – but, geez, people, how about waiting for these rumors to become reality before dumping on Apple? There's enough to complain about already, such as what they charge for SSD upgrades.

I'm itching to replace my early 2008 MBP, which is painfully slow for Aperture, but I'm going to try to hold out for the Haswell lineup and see how the new machines perform.

If a retina mba happens, then there is no reason for a retina mbp. Having a retina screen is more than just a price issue. Retina screens use considerably more power, so they require a bigger battery. That increases thickness, and the result is the current retina mbp 13".

 

[irDigital0l]

Could care less about a Retina display MBA...

But the thing is I need a not overly priced laptop for college next year.

Was expecting Apple to do a spec bump and a price drop with the MBA like what they did in WWDC 2012.

 

[erio]

What about a thinner Thunderbolt Display with USB 3.0?
I figured that would come out next after the thinner iMacs, no?

 

[TSE]

The way I see it is Apple's current notebook lineup is overlapping and confusing.

The 13" Air and the 13" Pro both cannibalize each other, the 15" MacBook Pro and 15" Retina MacBook Pro cannibalize each other, etc. etc.

Some theories of mine:

Theory 1:

Cut the 13" Air, keep the 13" Retina MBP, cut the 15" Macbook Pro, keep the 15" Retina MacBook Pro.

So:

11.6" Air, 13" Retina MacBook Pro, 15" Retina MacBook Pro.

Theory 2:

Throw an ARM Processor into the 11" Air and 13" Air. This should increase battery life to around 9-10 hours. Possibly turn them into tablet convertibles? Unlikely, but would be interesting.

I think either way, the MacBook Pros with optical drives are on their way out, and I could see the prices of the Retina MacBook Pros decreasing to compensate.

 

[Val-kyrie]

I really hope you are wrong, but there are many indications you are correct--rumors of Apple running OS X on ARM have been floating around recently; MS talking about running future versions of Windows on ARM only; the introduction of an ARM-based Win tablet; the tablet-based design of Win 8; the slow convergence of OS X with iOS....

If Apple launches a notebook run by an ARM processor, then the future direction of OS X will be clear. Right now, this rumor makes me feel as if I am peering over but one more "cliff."

The major holdup for retina in the Macbook Air is power consumption (and cost). Even with Haswell, I don't think Apple will be able to maintain the battery life in the notebook so that won't happen.

The Air will be the first Arm based Mac, it is just a matter of time...if not this year, then soon. As soon as Apple can offer similar performance in the Air, this will allow better battery life and a retina screen.

*This is similar to the Intel transition...as Jobs stated, they had intel on OSX for years but never released it, just in case. If you don't think Apple already has a version of OSX that runs on ARM, you're crazy.

I also would think the Air might be the first to see a Black Anodized body like the iPhone/iPad Mini. That would be cool.

 

[HenryDJP]

Right now Apple lowballs the specs on its most portable models. The 13" rMBP is maybe the most absurd low balling, followed closely by the 11" MBA that has 64 GB of flash storage. I'm convinced they do this both because they want to promote their iPads and their iMacs. They don't want their ultraportables becoming the "main machine" for anyone because ideally they want one of the following combo:

1. iMac/MBA
2. CMBP/iPad
3. 15" rMBP/iPad/MBA

So either they'll continue to lowball the MBA or they'll continue to inflate the price of the 13" rMBP. They simply don't want anyone being too comfortable with ONE ultraportable Mac because they want you to for some reason also "need" an iMac or iPad.

I'm not counting the iPhone in this because I believe the phone will always be marketed to a much wider group than the Macs.

You're stating all this as fact? It's only your opinion. There are too many people that have different needs. What the heck is a "C" Macbook Pro?

 

[Hunabku]

I am always astonished at the people who think dumping Intel and using an Apple "CPU" would be a good thing.

It would be a monumental stupid thing to do...

-P

What would be stupid is not doing it. If i thought I could create a critical component of my product better than my supplier - in a way that does not limit my options of using that supplier going forward - then absolutely I would!

Intel will milk the high-end as much as it can. Until Intel gets onboard with a new architecture, it will continue to see its lower-end offerings usurped.

 

[Ubele]

If a retina mba happens, then there is no reason for a retina mbp. Having a retina screen is more than just a price issue. Retina screens use considerably more power, so they require a bigger battery. That increases thickness, and the result is the current retina mbp 13".

That's one of the technical reasons that makes me think it unlikely we'll see Retina MBAs in 2013. But would the power savings from Haswell offset the increased power drain from a Retina screen, or would there still be too big a difference? If it would be more or less a wash, I can see Apple adding Retina to the MBAs while maintaining current battery life, rather than keeping the conventional displays and increasing battery life, because that's the type of direction Apple usually takes with new product features. "All MacBooks – all Retina" makes better ad copy than "The new MacBook Air – now with longer battery life!"

That would leave the question of how Apple would differentiate the 13" MBA from the 13" MBP enough to justify a significant price difference. On the other hand, the gap between the low-end 13" MBP and the high-end 13" consumer MacBook has fluctuated over the years. Sometimes, the MacBook was a better value. At other times, the MBP was a better value. At some point, I expect we'll see only one laptop line with 11", 13", and 15" Retina models, which you can configure with different processor, RAM, and storage options. The 15" will have a discrete graphics card, and the other two will have integrated graphics.

----------

Good post... Thank you for NOT being an idiot! I can't believe how worked up people get about rumors. It is one thing to speculate, but it is another thing to blast Apple for something they haven't even done yet... and might never do. The sky is not falling people!

Thanks. I can't always tell the trolls from the true idiots, but both can be equally annoying.

 

[Lancer]

Actually, you can (cMBP only). Just need a special screwdriver,
which could be bought dirt cheap from some Chinese online shop.

I meant without tools, most users won't want to crack open their MacBook. I understand why Apple went this way and with better batteries it makes sense to lock them inside and maybe have to change them in 2-3 years.

 

[PurrBall]

You are more likely to get struck by lightning then somehow develop corrupted ram in a laptop you have had for awhile.

In the past few years I've had 3 or 4 bad sticks of RAM develop. Haven't been struck by lightning yet.

 

[calaverasgrande]

I certainly hope this means some new flavor of Intel, or at the worst a switch to AMD. If they think they can go over to ARM chips for laptops and stay competitive, I will be switching back to PCs.
The last time Apple did it's own chips was a dismal failure. You always had to grin and bear it as you forked over wads of cash for a G4 or G5 that was obsolete the day it was debuted.

 

[MacSince1990]

Let's see $2200 for a computer. Sell it in two years for $1000

Cost of ownership $50 a month or about $2 per work day. Ouch!

Do you earn anything from the use of your computer?

Right. And if that was his only expense, perhaps it would be less of a consideration. However, most people are burdened with a desire for a roof over their heads... oh, and a powerful need to eat. Among other things.

Using your logic, why not buy a $10,000 computer? Only about $9/work day, right?

 

[wizard]

hmm... my read of it was Haswell, but just to invoke a crazy theory -- "new processor platform" - something not intel?

arn

I would be shocked if Apple left Intel. Even more shocked if they left i86. On the other hand, in the AIR and the Mini Apple would do well to consider AMD just for the better GPU performance.

As for ARM, I'm not against Apple introducing another line of laptops with an ARM based processor. As long as the processor is 64 bit and has proper GPU capabilities for a "PC" type machine it would be great for many. What wouldn't be so great is giving up on i86 for those of us that still need it.

 

[KnightWRX]

I think he said that competitors' 7" tablets were not ideal.

And I agree. 7" 16:9 tablets are too narrow in portrait and too short in landscape.

Even though 4:3 is "outdated" I still think it's great for tablets.

That's not what he said though. He said anything smaller than a iPad was DOA. The full quote from the '11 earning's call :

Apple has done extensive user testing on user interfaces over many years, and we really understand this stuff. There are clear limits of how close you can physically place elements on a touchscreen before users cannot reliably tap, flick or pinch them. This is one of the key reasons we think the 10-inch screen size is the minimum size required to create great tablet apps.

IE, iPad Mini again makes Steve eat his own words. But Steve is used to doing that. He'll tell what Apple doesn't have is DOA, bad for user experience and then 2 months later, when Apple ships such a device, he'll tell you it's because "they nailed it" and that everything before it was in fact crap and only Apple's version is good.

Steve was a salesman. He lied to sell you his stuff and make you think it was the best and only good thing out there.

 

[robertcoogan]

Optical drive...?

I really hope they don't get rid of the optical drive on these new models...that would force me to hunt ebay for older MBP with the built-in drives I need.

 

[wizard]

Hey some of us are still on 2008 MBPs! Haswell could be good enough in an AIR to make a switch. However there is such a range of performance scheduled it is had to say if Apple will implement the right solution. That and the AIR needs an update to the Flash storage options.

As to screens there is lots of hand wringing over retina, the costs and feasibility . I'm wondering if Apple might consider IGZO in the same resolution as is in the current AIRs. This would significantly reduce power drain yet allow the lower performance processors in the AIRs to drive the screens well. I'm just not seeing a great leap in ULV processor/GPU performance. At least not enough for the AIRs.

True, that's why I think I'll wait this out for a change..My 13" 2011 is still fine and I have the more important dilemma of what / how to proceed wit my MBP 17". A new MBA would be nice, but it's really a luxury item, not a must have.

 

[ThatsMeRight]

"Haswell will incorporate CPU performance boosts as well as double the performance of the integrated GPU."

Neat, the retina screen just needs four time the performance.

Yep, Apple will never release a device with a Retina display that has a GPU only twice as powerful compared to the previous generation.

I'm, of course, talking about the iPad 3: 4x the resolution (compared to the iPad 2), 2x the GPU power.

 

[yanksrock100]

Does this mean the new MBPs will be the price of the current non-retina MBPs? Because Apple doesn't tend to raise prices without maintaining a cheaper product line for those who want the usual price (as they did with iPad 2 and non retina MBP).

I think the current non retina MBP is quite the right price, and it would be great if they could achieve that with the new version at some point. If they consolidate the two, at least they should reduce the price because people will have no other option.

Not quite. There may be a slight drop, but it will stay high. I think this means that Apple will only have the Air's at that price point. I also think the Airs will not have retina.

I think....
Airs (non Retina):$999-$1499 Pros (all with Retina): $1599+

 

[KnightWRX]

Yep, Apple will never release a device with a Retina display that has a GPU only twice as powerful compared to the previous generation.

I'm, of course, talking about the iPad 3: 4x the resolution (compared to the iPad 2), 2x the GPU power.

The fact is, GPU power has been there for a long time for Retina like resolutions. The GPU isn't bottlenecked at all. We've been running multiple monitor configurations and even the 30" ACD for close to what now ? 6 years and more. GPU tech has advanced so rapidly in the last decade it's not even funny. In 1998, you could already run 1600x1200 monitors off GPUs with 4 MB of WRAM (Matrox Millennium), which could barely drive a 3D game, had no hardware texture mapping or even T&L engines or shader engines.

Yet people are sitting there, in 2012, thinking a modern GPU has a hard time pushing 2880x1800. Astounding.

 

[Santabean2000]

Can you show us where you got the 98% of the MBP buyers from?
Do you have data to back that up? Or was that just your opinion?

Just a gestimate based on anecdotal evidence from my personal and professional experiences.


“Oh, people can come up with statistics to prove anything. 14% of people know that.”
Homer Simpson

 

[xVeinx]

The fact is, GPU power has been there for a long time for Retina like resolutions. The GPU isn't bottlenecked at all. We've been running multiple monitor configurations and even the 30" ACD for close to what now ? 6 years and more. GPU tech has advanced so rapidly in the last decade it's not even funny. In 1998, you could already run 1600x1200 monitors off GPUs with 4 MB of WRAM (Matrox Millennium), which could barely drive a 3D game, had no hardware texture mapping or even T&L engines or shader engines.

Yet people are sitting there, in 2012, thinking a modern GPU has a hard time pushing 2880x1800. Astounding.

People equate GPU performance with whether or not scrolling in Safari is 'smooth' or if they can play a particular game at full retina resolution. The ability to drive a monitor of that resolution is of course there, though the included hardware may not allow for as optimal a viewing experience as possible. You're right, the hardware has improved in leaps and bounds. The smoothness of the animations or gameplay is also as dependent on software as it is on hardware. On the other hand, people have increased their expectations that they should be able to take any game, crank it to max, and have it "just work." People are conflating two concepts, but their point still stands: they want everything/anything to work at full resolution or else the hardware isn't "powerful enough." The distinctions simply are arbitrary beyond that.